Spy Shots: New Mazda3 caught with most of its covers off
by Sam Abuelsamid on Sep 17th 2008 at 10:45AM 
Ever since Ford's U.S. operations decided to forego the second-generation Focus in favor of a freshened version of the first generation model, Americans have been complaining that we can't get the best Focus. In fact, the essential underpinnings of that C1 Focus have been available here under two other brands. The pricier Volvo C30/S40/V50 and the current Mazda3. The Mazda has actually been quite popular here and it looks like it will be getting a mid-cycle refresh soon. Judging from the batch of spy photos that has popped up on a Czech website it won't be an all-new car. That's probably a couple more years away when the next-gen Focus comes to the U.S. market. Instead, the 3 is getting some new bodywork from the belt-line down. The greenhouse looks carry-over from the current car, while the front fender area in particular looks all new. The 3 looks set to inherit the arching wheelhouses used by other current Mazdas like the 6, CX-7 and CX-9 as well as the tiny Mazda2 that's not available here. Since they have taken off most of the heavy camouflage, it seems likely the 3 will be introduced fairly soon, probably at either the Los Angeles or Detroit Auto Show. Thanks to Kris for the tip![Source: news.auto.cz]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
summazooma 7:07AM (9/18/2008)
Not a mid-cycle refresh... Full model change is more like it.
Like many OEMs (especially the Japanese), there's often times a commonality between every other generation. Doesn't make this particular car any less a full change than the previous car; You yourselves mentioned that THAT car was the same platform as the Volvo C30/S40/V50 and Euro Focus (along with a string of associated platform-extensions in light truck), after all.
Regarding the car, I guess I'm not so surprised with a somewhat evolutionary look, albeit one with quite a few more organic flourishes from the series of concept vehicles of the past year. It will be interesting to see if this means they'll be able to grow on the momentum of the current car or if it ends up being less of a smash. This might make the inability to meet actual demand of the current car (terminally underproduced for the U.S., with the great side-effect of little incentives and growing sales at the end of it's lifecycle) seem like a genuine mistake, since it might effectively have "left some on the table" in terms of potential sales when "the iron was hot". I never understood why they didn't plan an alternate plan to share production with, for example, the Mazda6 operation at Flat Rock; If they had, they might have seen this generation of car truly grow into a market leader that Mazda has rarely (if ever), in terms of volume AND profitability, had in a mainstream segment.
Yes, I know, exchange rates & cost of production... however, if you have a winner, do you sacrifice having more people in your products, especially ones that are enthusiastic about it and love it, because it costs you? Those owners that had a Mazda3 are going to come back wanting the "Mazda3" of Mid-size Sedans, Compact CUVs, Mid-size CUVs, etc. (or, hell, like me, get another Mazda3 with more options). Why limit that pool of gonzo customers?
Reply